the animal bones from excavations in meshoko …eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk › 24860 › 1 ›...
TRANSCRIPT
1
The Animal Bones from Excavations in Meshoko Cave in
the Northern Caucasus
Ellen Hambleton and Mark Maltby
Department of Archaeology, Anthropology and Forensic
Sciences
Bournemouth University, UK
2
Contents Introduction: The Site and the Excavations ............................................................................................................ 3 Methods of Animal Bone Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 3 Assemblage Size and Preservation ......................................................................................................................... 4 Species Present ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
Species Representation in Hand-recovered Assemblage: ................................................................................... 7
Pig ........................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Pig Body Part Representation ............................................................................................................................. 7
Pig Butchery Evidence ....................................................................................................................................... 9
Pig Age at Death ............................................................................................................................................... 10
Pig Metrical Data .............................................................................................................................................. 11
Sheep/Goat ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 Sheep/Goat Body Part Representation .............................................................................................................. 12
Sheep/Goat Butchery Evidence ........................................................................................................................ 13
Sheep/Goat Age at Death .................................................................................................................................. 14
Sheep/Goat Metrical Data ................................................................................................................................. 14
Bovid .................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Bovid Body Part Representation....................................................................................................................... 15
Bovid Butchery Evidence ................................................................................................................................. 16
Bovid Age at Death .......................................................................................................................................... 16
Bovid Metrical Data ......................................................................................................................................... 17
Canid .................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Red Deer ............................................................................................................................................................... 17 Roe Deer ............................................................................................................................................................... 18 Wildcat ................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Beaver ................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Other Wild Species ............................................................................................................................................... 19 Birds ..................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Worked Bone ........................................................................................................................................................ 20 Discussion............................................................................................................................................................. 21
Layer 5 (Eneolithic) – Exploitation of Pigs, Sheep/Goat and Bovids ............................................................... 21
Layer 3 (Maikop Period) – Exploitation of Pigs, Sheep/Goat and Bovids ....................................................... 22
The Role of Wild Animals ................................................................................................................................ 23
Assessment of the Sieving Programme ............................................................................................................ 23
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 24 Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................................. 25 References ............................................................................................................................................................ 25
3
Introduction: The Site and the Excavations
This report is concerned with the analysis of the faunal remains recovered from the
excavations of Meshoko Cave in the North Caucasus region of south-western Russia. The
five seasons of excavations from 2011 to 2015 were directed by Evgenii Cherlenok of the
State University of Saint Petersburg. To date, material from six stratigraphic layers from
excavations near the entrance of the cave has been collected. Layers 5-6 belong to the late
Eneolithic (Chalcolithic) period, with radiocarbon dates centring around 3700 cal. BC. Layer
3 has produced Maikop cultural materials dating to the early Bronze Age. Layer 1 contains a
very mixed material culture assemblage and therefore the bones could belong to a wide range
of dates. Layer 2 belongs to the Bronze Age. Layer 4 is thin layer and it may not represent a
cultural phase.
In all seasons, animal bones collected by hand were assigned where possible to a location
point, which will in due course provide the opportunity to examine intra-site distributions in
detail. In addition, all the spoil from the 2015 excavations was sieved, which has enabled an
assessment to be made of the efficiency of recovery of faunal remains by normal excavation
methods.
Methods of Animal Bone Analysis
All the animal bones and teeth recovered by normal excavation from the 2011-2015 seasons
were recorded individually onto a relational database (Microsoft Access), which forms part of
the site archive. All fragments, including loose teeth, limb bone shaft fragments, rib heads and
vertebral centra were recorded to species level where possible. If this was not possible, the
specimen was assigned to one of various size categories: large mammal (cattle; red deer;
horse); medium-sized mammal (pig; sheep/goat; dog; cat; roe deer etc); small mammal
(mainly rodents); and large, medium-sized and small birds. In cases where it was not possible
to assign a size category, the specimen was recorded as an unidentified mammal or bird
Identifications were occasionally facilitated by reference to identification manuals and/or
consultation with some of our colleagues. Most of the sheep/goat bones could not be assigned
to either species, but it was possible to identify some elements specifically as sheep or goat
following the guidelines of Boessneck (1969), Payne (1985), Prummel and Frisch (1986) and
Zeder and Lapham (2010). Some of the largest bones of pig, bovid, and sheep/goat could have
been from wild animals but the majority were from smaller domestic stock. Because of the
lack of an available skeleton reference collection and/or because of very similar morphologies,
it was not possible to assign most of the bird and small mammal bones to a particular species.
All the bird bones have been assigned to size categories and provisional identifications are
discussed in this report. Worked bone artefacts housed at the Heritage Museum were
examined for the purposes of species and element identification. All the sieved material from
the 2015 excavations was scanned, but only identifiable specimens were counted.
4
Assemblage (context) summaries were created for each layer for each year of excavation (e.g
2013 Layer 2; 2015 Layer 5 etc.). In addition, assemblages recovered from discrete pits were
treated separately (e.g. 2013 Layer 3 Pit 71). In the main database table the following
information was recorded where appropriate for each specimen: year of excavation;
stratigraphic layer; feature; location point; species/taxon; anatomical element; zones of bone
present; approximate percentage of bone present; evidence for any taphonomic processes
(e.g. gnawing damage; erosion; weathering; charring; calcification; concretions); epiphyseal
fusion data; other comments including observations of pathology. Some bones had modern or
occasionally ancient breaks, which could be refitted. Such specimens were recorded as a
single element but the refitting was noted.
Separate tables linked to the main table by an individual identification number were created
for metrical, butchery and tooth ageing data. Tooth eruption and wear descriptions for cattle,
sheep/goat and pig follow the method of Grant (1982). Where possible, age ranges were
assigned to these specimens based on Silver (1969); Payne (1973); Hambleton (1999); Jones
(2006; 2012a; 2012b); and Matschke (1967). The state of epiphyseal fusion was recorded for
selected post-cranial elements and, where possible, ages assigned following Silver (1969) and
Reitz and Wing (1999:76). Most measurements followed those described by von den Driesch
(1976).
Assemblage Size and Preservation
A total of 3,455 animal bone fragments were recovered by hand from the 2011-2015
excavations, of which 1,548 have been identified to species, or nearest taxa (Table 1). A
further 249 fragments were recorded from samples retrieved mainly from the 2015
excavations (unidentified mammal fragments were not recorded in sieved samples).
The assemblages from Layers 2, 4 and 6 are small, each providing fewer than 50 identified
elements. Layer 1 produced nearly 200 identified specimens, but this assemblage must be
treated with caution because of dating issues. Therefore the largest and most reliable samples
come from Layers 3 and 5. Layer 3 (Maikop) produced over 800 fragments from hand
excavation, of which nearly 400 have been identified. Layer 5 (Eneolithic) provided over
2,000 fragments from hand excavation including over 1,100 identified specimens. The counts
from Layers 3 and 5 were supplemented by identifications of material from the sieved
residues (Table 1). Therefore most of the discussion related to possible chronological
variations in the faunal assemblage will be focused on comparisons between Layers 3 and 5.
A total of 112 separate assemblage groups were created. These included assemblages from 78
pit contexts. Nearly all of the remaining assemblage came from the general layers excavated
in different years. Most of the pit assemblages were very small, often producing less than 10
bone fragments. Preliminary assessment indicated that were no significant differences
between the assemblages from the pits and layers.
5
The surface preservation of most of the bones recovered was good. Hardly any of the
identified elements were eroded and only around 6% showed signs of weathering. This is not
surprising given that the bones were deposited in the sheltered cave. 6% of the identified
bones had an ivoried appearance. The causes of these surface modifications are complex but
high percentages of ivoried bones usually indicate good surface preservation (Table 2).
However, there are other indications that the faunal assemblage has been severely damaged.
Evidence of gnawing was observed on 15% of the surviving identified elements (excluding
loose teeth). Most of the gnawing marks are characteristic of those inflicted by canids and it
can be assumed that dogs kept by the inhabitants of the cave had regular access to the bones
deposited there. A total of six specimens (2 from Layer 3; 4 from Layer 5) have evidence of
acid erosion, indicating that they have been digested. These all consist of phalanges and small
portions of metapodials of the major mammal species (3 pig; 2 sheep/goat; 1 bovid).
Although humans sometimes consume bones, it is much more likely that these discarded poor
quality meat bones were eaten by dogs and subsequently redeposited in their faeces. The
relatively high incidence of dog gnawing on surviving bones also implies that many more
would have been completely destroyed by this agency. The more fragile bones of younger
and smaller animals would have been more susceptible to total destruction.
At least 12 identified bones (2 from Layer 3; 10 from Layer 5) have been damaged by rodent
gnawing. There is no evidence to suggest that this rodent activity postdated the human
occupation of the cave and it is therefore likely that humans shared the cave with rodents,
some of whose bones were also discovered during the excavations (see Table 1 and
discussion below).
Evidence for burning was recorded on 65 identified bone elements (Table 2). The degree of
burning varied from slight evidence of scorching through to the complete charring
(blackening) of the bone. In addition, 119 unidentified fragments recovered by hand
collection were also charred and four were calcined (white). There is no evidence for areas of
high concentrations of burnt bones, apart from Layer 2, in which 16% of the fragments were
charred, including slight scorching on two of the ribs and a thoracic vertebra of the neonatal
calf partial skeleton. It is likely that these and other bones in this layer were damaged by fire
after deposition.
Another common occurrence was the presence of concretions adhering to the bones,
particularly in Layers 4 and 5 (Table 2). Although the concretions did not damage the bones
themselves, in the more severe cases they prevented identification and would have obscured
any evidence of butchery.
The assemblage was generally highly fragmented. Many of the fragments consisted of very
small portions of the complete bones rendering many of them unidentifiable. Over half of the
hand-collected material was unidentified, with only the assemblage from Layer 1 containing
more identified fragments than unidentified ones (Table 2). An indication of the generally
highly fragmented state of even the identified bones can be seen in the fragmentation
6
evidence of the major limb bones, mandibles, scapulae and pelves of all the identified species
(Table 3). These bones were divided into five size categories ranging from ≤10% to 100% of
the complete bone. 69% of the bones fell into the smallest size category and only nine out of
694 bones were complete. Overall, the approximate mean size of these identified elements
was 19%. There were insignificant differences between the two largest samples from Layers
3 and 5. The average size of the identified bones recovered from Layer 1 was slightly larger
(24%). The less fragmented nature of this assemblage would partially account for the higher
percentage of identified elements recorded in this layer (Table 2). Unsurprisingly,
fragmentation was particularly marked in the bovid assemblage where 134 of the 150 major
bones with recorded fragmentation consisted of ≤10% of the complete bone and the
approximate mean size was only 12%. The major bones of the smaller species are less likely
to break into as many identifiable fragments. Nevertheless pig fragmentation levels were high
(mean = 17%). The sheep/goat assemblage was a little less fragmented (mean = 22%).
Fragmentation of bones can be caused by a multitude of factors including carcass division,
cooking, gnawing, erosion and weathering. In this case the most likely additional cause of
fragmentation is trampling. In this respect it is probably significant that the assemblages from
the pits were generally slightly less fragmented (24%) than those from the layers (18%),
indicating the pits gave some protection to the bones. Many of the bones in the pits, however,
were incorporated only after they had been subjected to trampling and other causes of
fragmentation.
Another indicator of the general standard of bone preservation is the number of loose teeth
recovered. Loose teeth usually indicate that the mandibles and maxillae in which they were
set have been destroyed or severely fragmented. Therefore high levels of loose teeth often
indicate poor survival, although their abundance can also be affected by different retrieval
standards. Given the high fragmentation levels of this assemblage along with the careful
excavation methods, high levels of loose teeth should be expected and this is indeed the case,
with loose teeth providing 17% of the overall assemblage (Table 2). Loose teeth provide
significantly higher percentages of the assemblages from Layers 1-3 than in Layers 4-5,
indicating that the assemblages from the later levels are less well preserved than those from
the Eneolithic period.
Species Present
A fairly wide range of species were identified from among the hand-recovered and sieved
assemblages, including domestic and wild large mammals (in order of abundance pig,
sheep/goat, bovid, red deer, dog, roe deer, beaver, wildcat, hare and otter), and wild small
creatures, including hamster, mole, hedgehog, squirrel, frog and lizard, and numerous
unidentified small mammal (rodents) of mouse size and rat size, including two fragments of
unidentified small carnivore (mustelidae). Birds were also present (identifications are
discussed in a later section).
7
Species Representation in Hand-recovered Assemblage:
Remains were recovered from all stratigraphic layers 1-6 during 2011-2015 (Table 1). The
largest animal bone assemblages came from the eneolithic Layer 5 (2030 fragments) and the
Maikop Layer 3 (808 fragments). Layers 1, 2, 4 and 6 produced far fewer bones. Overall, the
assemblage is dominated by pig, sheep and bovid, which together make up over 93% of all
identified specimens. Red deer were present in small numbers in all layers. Dogs were
present in very low numbers, and no dog bones were recovered from Layers 4 and 6. It is
worthy of note that no horse remains were recovered from any layers at Meshoko Cave.
The relative importance of the five main mammal species varies between stratigraphic layers
(Table 4), although only assemblages from Layers 1, 3 and 5 are large enough to provide
reliable comparisons. Bovid are consistently the third most abundant species in Layers 1, 3
and 5, but the relative importance of sheep and pig differs between these layers. In Layer 1
sheep/goat (48%) are more abundant than pig (27%). In Layer 3 this is reversed and pig
(45%) are more abundant than sheep/goat (28%). The situation is different again in Layer 5
where sheep/goat (37%) and pig (36%) are of almost equal abundance.
Some variations in species abundance are apparent within each layer when comparing
assemblages from different excavation years (Table 5). Where assemblage sizes are large
enough to reliably compare results, in Layer 3 the 2013 and 2015 assemblages display
broadly similar patterns of species abundance. However, in Layer 5 the assemblage
compositions are more variable between different excavation years. For example, in 2011
Layer 5, bovid are more abundant than pig and sheep/goat, while in 2012 pigs are most
abundant followed by bovid then sheep/goat. In particular, there is a significant difference in
the 2013 assemblage from Layer 5 compared to other years. 2013 Layer 5 has a much greater
abundance of sheep/goat (72%) and a scarcity of bovid (1%) compared to other years
assemblages from the same layer. The 2013 sample may account for much of the apparent
differences between Layers 3 and 5 overall. The differences between years may at least partly
be an artefact of the quite small sample sized involved, although genuine spatial intra-site
variation in animal bone deposition and/or subtle differences in horizons within stratigraphic
layers may also account for these differences.
Pig
A total of 596 fragments of pig bones and teeth (including 42 fragments from the sieved
material) were recovered, representing an MNI (Minimum Number of Individuals) of 18 pigs.
Pig Body Part Representation
8
Full details of the elements represented of all species are stored in archive tables. The
elements represented in the two largest pig assemblages can be compared in Figure 1. These
have been divided into six broader categories for the purpose of this discussion: cranial
elements; loose teeth; upper forelimb (including scapula); upper hindlimb (including pelvis);
lower limbs; trunk (ribs and vertebrae). It should be noted that the numbers of elements
incorporated into these zones are not equal. For example, the upper forelimb category
consists of only four elements whereas the lower limb category potentially incorporates more
than 30 bones in pigs. This bias is to an extent offset by the fact that many of the foot bones
are very small and often do not survive or are overlooked during excavation. In addition, the
cranial elements and upper limb bones tend to be much more fragmented than the foot bones
and potentially one bone could produce several different specimens that have been counted.
Results for pig are shown in Table 6. Cranial elements are well represented throughout the
deposits providing 22% of the overall pig NISP counts. These include a large number of
small fragments from skulls, although mandibles are also well represented (Figure 1).
Employing minimum number of element counts (MNE), a minimum of 18 different skulls
and 13 mandibles are represented in the hand-collected assemblage. Cranial elements often
form substantial portions of pig assemblages from archaeological sites and the results from
Meshoko Cave are not unusual in this respect.
Loose teeth provide 23% of the pig NISP counts and were the most common elements
retrieved from sieving (Table 6). They also form over half of the pig elements in Layer 1 and
nearly a third of those from Layer 3. In contrast they only form 13% of the assemblage from
Layer 5, reflecting the broader trends in loose teeth abundance discussed above, and
indicating that the pig assemblage was better preserved in Layer 5.
The upper limb bones of both the forelimb and hindlimb are both quite well represented.
They should be present in roughly equal numbers and this is the case overall (12% and 14%
of the NISP counts respectively). However, this picture disguises some variations between
layers. Whereas upper forelimb elements outnumber those of the hindlimb in Layer 3, the
opposite is true in Layers 1 and 5. In the latter case, this is partially the result of an increased
percentage of pelvis fragments in some areas of the cave (Figure 1). Amongst the forelimb
elements, humerus fragments are much better represented than the others, partially reflecting
its greater robusticity. This is also reflected in the MNE counts, in which at least 18 humeri
were represented in hand-collected material compared with only nine scapulae, eight ulnae
and four pelves. With regard to the hindlimb elements, roughly equal numbers of tibiae and
femora fragments are represented throughout, whereas as noted above pelves are much better
represented in Layer 5 than in Layer 3 (Figure 1). The ageing evidence of the pelves from
Level 5 is discussed below. The, smaller, more fragile, fibula is less well represented and the
only pig patella was recovered in a sieved sample. Overall MNE counts see pelves (14)
outnumbering both tibia (13) and femur (11), with at least ten pelves represented in Layer 5
compared with just five femora and tibiae.
9
Lower limb bones provided around 14% of the pig assemblage collected by hand. As noted
above, theoretically these should outnumber the numbers of upper limb bones because there
are so many more bones in the pig’s foot. It is possible that the feet of some pigs were
removed prior to the carcasses being brought into the cave. However, because of retrieval and
survival biases pig foot bones are rarely well represented in archaeological assemblages and
it should be noted that lower limb bones form 31% of the pig elements recovered from
sieving, showing that these were more likely to be overlooked during normal excavation
(Table 6). Lower limb bones were generally better represented in Layer 5 than in Layer 3
(Figure 1). MNE estimates also reflect the relatively poor representation of pig foot bones.
The highest MNE (for the metatarsals) was only 5.
Ribs and vertebrae (trunk) were relatively well represented (10%) particularly in Layer 5
(14% - Table 6). Their relative abundance in Layer 5 again probably mainly reflects better
survival conditions, although the possibility that some meat-bearing parts of the body were
introduced into the cave after initial butchery elsewhere should also be considered,
particularly as rib shafts of unidentified medium-sized mammals are quite well represented,
again particularly in Layer 5 (Table 7).
Pig Butchery Evidence
The body part analysis discussed above indicates that all parts of pig carcasses were quite
well represented and although it is feasible that the assemblage includes some joints of meat
prepared outside the cave itself, it is likely that many pigs were butchered within the cave.
Butchery marks were observed on a total of 29 pig elements from Layers 3 and 5 (Table 8).
This is quite a low incidence of butchery but the highly fragmented nature of the assemblage
can partially explain this.
An unusually complete pig skull from Layer 5 (Point 12.4024) has possible evidence for
pole-axing, as it displays several sharp chop marks on the frontal/parietal region on the top of
the skull (Figure 2). If so, this indicates that the pig was slaughtered inside or in the vicinity
of the cave. Similar marks were found towards the back of another pig skull from Layer 5.
Finer cuts located near the upper orbit of a third skull are more likely to have been the result
of skinning and cleaning the skull and a fine cut on the lateral aspect of a maxilla from Layer
3 is likely to have been made during the removal of cheek meat.
Fine incisions were observed on various parts of five pig mandibles, four of which were from
Layer 3. In two cases the location of the cuts towards the back of the mandible (ramus) is
indicative of the separation of the lower jaw from the skull. The other cuts were located on
the inside (lingual) or underside (ventral) aspects of the jaws and are more likely to have been
made during extraction of the tongue. Two scapulae and a humerus from Layer 5 have cut
marks probably made during filleting of meat from the upper forelimb. No marks were
observed on any of the other forelimb elements.
10
Despite their abundance, butchery marks were observed on only one pig pelvis. This
consisted of a cut on the outside of the ilium of one of the largest pig specimens, which could
have been a wild boar. A tibia of a juvenile pig from Layer 3 has cuts near the distal end
indicating that this piglet carcass had been dismembered. Another tibia from this layer bore
several knife cuts on its shaft indicative of filleting. A corresponding cut was observed on a
fibula.
Cuts on an astragalus, centroquartal and the proximal end of a metacarpal bear evidence for
the removal of the feet from the upper limbs. Butchery marks were observed on a total of
seven vertebrae from Layer 5. These all consisted of fine incisions. Those observed on
thoracic and lumbar vertebrae were all associated with the removal of the flanks of the animal
from the vertebral column. Corresponding marks were observed on three rib heads.
Transverse cut marks on cervical vertebrae indicated where the skull had been separated from
the neck.
Pig butchery was therefore carried out with the aid of fine blades and the only evidence for
the use of a heavier implement was on the skulls which show possible evidence of pole-
axing. Dismemberment of carcasses with fine knives often does not leave cut marks on
bones, as the focus is on cutting through ligaments rather than the bones themselves. Many of
the bones were probably also broken open to extract marrow and for pot-boiling.
Unfortunately subsequent trampling, gnawing and other taphonomic factors have destroyed
much of this evidence.
Pig Age at Death
Estimation of age at death was possible for 22 mandibles or loose teeth, the majority of which
(17 specimens) were from individuals younger than 27 months at death. Among these young
pigs there was a high proportion of individuals (12 specimens) that died as juveniles
(<14months) and were most probably killed in the latter half of their first year. The teeth
provide very little evidence for exploitation of very young pig, with only one mandible
belonging to a neonate/infant <6 months. There were three specimens of young adults (c.2-3
years old at death) and only two older specimens (>3years at death), of which one was from a
very mature adult. The sample is too small to enable detailed reconstruction any analysis of
mortality and survivorship profiles, nevertheless, the small sample from Layer 3 (15
specimens) and the even smaller sample from Layer 5 (5 specimens) both show similar
emphasis on juveniles, with very few adults.
The epiphyseal fusion dataset is mainly comprised of remains from Layer 5, with other layers
making no significant contribution. A preference for the consumption of juvenile pigs is
evident from the epiphyseal fusion data: amongst the 30 surviving elements known to fuse by
c.12 months, exactly half remain unfused, suggesting a high proportion of pigs were killed in
their first year. Among the elements known to fuse at 2-2 ½ years, the majority from the cave
were unfused and only one third were fused at death, supporting the observation from the
dental ageing that most pigs were killed before the age of c.2 ½ years. Among the later fusing
11
elements (known to fuse by c.3-3 ½ years) only 10% were found to be fused, further
supporting the conclusion that mature adults were only rarely killed and consumed by the
inhabitants of Meshoko Cave.
The available ageing data is not sufficiently well refined to determine season of death, and it
is not possible to say whether occupation of the cave was all year round or seasonal. Neonatal
pigs are present in the assemblage from Meshoko Cave, but only in very small numbers. Only
nine very porous bones (indicative of neonates) were recovered, including five from Layer 5
and two from Layer 3. This suggests pigs were present in the vicinity of the cave during
birthing season (spring). In addition, the early fusion sample includes ten unfused pelves
from Layer 5, all of which were similar in size and shared the same level of development,
perhaps indicating a group of individuals, several months old but less than one year, all killed
at the same age and time of year.
The ageing evidence from the pig remains points strongly towards an emphasis on the
exploitation of young pigs, with a particular preference for juvenile pigs killed in their first
year. Very few individuals were kept beyond 3 years. This is a pattern typical of domestic pig
exploitation. The one or two older animals present probably represent preferred breeding
stock, or possibly the occasional acquisition of wild pig.
Pig Metrical Data
The highly fragmented condition of most of the bones prevented the recording of
measurements for all species. In addition the prevalence of immature animals severely
limited the number of fully fused bones of pig that could be measured and some of those that
were measured may not have grown to full size. Measurements of teeth were also restricted
by the fact that many of them were incomplete. The metrical data are presented in Table 9.
Only five specimens from Layer 3 were measured, the remaining 14 coming from Layer 5.
The metrical data support the impressions gained during recording that there was a wide
range in the size of the pig bones indicating that both domestic pigs and wild boar were
represented in the sample. Some of the measurements clearly fall into the size ranges of
domestic boar. For example, a lower third molar from Layer 5 has a greatest length of
45.3mm, which falls into the size range of modern wild boar from the Caucasus (Albarella et
al. 2009, 110). By contrast another third molar from the same layer measured 32.3mm, well
within the domestic pig range. Similarly, two distal tibiae from Layer 3 and a proximal radius
from Layer 5 fall comfortably within the domestic pig range, whereas an astragalus from
Layer 5 has a lateral length more likely to place it within the wild category. However, many
of the other measurements fall into the areas of size overlap between large domestic pigs and
small wild boar. For example, the two distal humeri from Layer 5 have articular breadth
measurements comparable to wild boar found in various parts of Europe (Albarella et al.
2009, 116) but also fall into the range of domestic pigs found, for example, in Roman Britain
(Maltby 2010). Tooth measurement of modern Caucasian wild boar suggest that they are
large compared with wild boar populations elsewhere in Europe but unfortunately there are
very few measurements of the post-cranial skeleton available to make comparisons (Albarella
12
et al. 2009). Given these problems, all that can be said at the moment is that the pigs from
Meshoko Cave came from both domestic and wild animals. Given the presence of bones of
perinatal mortalities and the general mortality patterns which indicate a high kill-off of young
animals, it seems likely that the majority of the pigs were domestic but some wild boar were
also captured.
Sheep/Goat
A total of 562 fragments of sheep and goat (22 from sieved material) were recovered. These
represent an MNI of 18 sheep/goats.
It was possible to distinguish between sheep and goat on a small proportion of specimens. A
total of 20 fragments of bone and teeth were identified as sheep (Ovis aries), and a further 19
specimens confirmed as goat (Capra hircus). The presence of sheep is confirmed in Layer 1
(6 fragments), Layer 3 (3 fragments), Layer 4 (1 fragment) and Layer 5 (10 fragments). By
contrast, all 19 firm identifications of goat came from Layer 5. However, goats are almost
certainly present in Layer 3 (at least two adult teeth from Layer 3 have been provisionally
identified as goat). Although a small sample, these results are interesting as they suggests that
exploitation of goat may have been more common during the early periods of occupation at
the cave (Layer 5) than in the later period of occupation (Layer 3). Differentiation of sheep
and goat is difficult, especially when remains are fragmentary, so the vast majority of
sheep/goat remains in our sample were not further differentiated. Hereafter sheep and goat
are discussed together as sheep/goat.
Sheep/Goat Body Part Representation
A summary of sheep/goat body part data is shown in Table 10 and percentages of the
different elements in Layers 3 and 5 are provided in Figure 3. Full details are stored in the
site archive tables.
There is quite an even representation of body parts throughout the deposits although there are
some minor differences visible on closer inspection. Cranial elements form around 18% of
the assemblage throughout the deposits Table 10. At least 18 different mandibles are
represented overall. Loose teeth were the most commonly recorded indicating the highly
fragmented nature of the assemblage. However, they formed only 5% of the Layer 5
assemblage compared with 26% in Layer 3, indicating that the sheep/goat assemblage was
better preserved in the earlier layer, which is indicated by the corresponding higher
percentages of limb and trunk bones in Layer 5. Upper forelimb bones are slightly less well
represented than their hindlimb counterparts. The radius was the most commonly recorded of
these, outnumbering the humerus, scapula and ulna in both Layers 3 and 5 (Figure 3). The
radius remained the most common of these bones in the overall MNE counts (16), followed
by scapula (13), humerus (11) and ulna (10).
13
The tibia was the most commonly recorded hindlimb element, and it was the most common
sheep/goat element in Layer 5, although it was not as prominent in the Layer 3 assemblage
(Figure 3). Although the pelvis was comfortably outnumbered by tibia in the NISP counts, it
produced a slightly higher MNE estimate (12) than either tibia (11) or femur (10).
The lower limb bones were dominated by metatarsal and metacarpal fragments. The
relatively high numbers of metapodials fragments that could not be more closely identified is
another indication of the highly fragmented nature of the assemblage. Metacarpal fragments
tended to be slightly more common than metatarsals in the upper layers whereas the reverse
is the case in the earlier deposits, but the differences are not extreme. Overall, at least 14
metatarsals and 13 metacarpals are represented. Phalanges, carpals and tarsals were much less
frequently retrieved, although at least nine astragali and six calcanea are represented.
Sheep/Goat ribs and vertebrae, as in the case of pig, were significantly better represented in
Layer 5 than in Layer 3 and provided around 10% of the sheep/goat assemblage overall.
Many of the unidentified mammal rib fragments would also have belonged to sheep/goat
(Table 7). The higher incidence probably reflects better preservation.
The sheep/goat assemblage is formed of a relatively evenly balanced distribution of bones
from all parts of the body. Variations can mainly be attributed to differential preservation and
recovery. Most sheep/goat assemblages are dominated by the densest elements such as loose
teeth, mandibles and the shafts of radius, tibia and metapodials. This is also the case at
Meshoko Cave. The under-representation of carpals, tarsals and phalanges is likely to be the
result of retrieval bias and these elements were indeed relatively more common encountered
in the sieved assemblage (Table 10). Therefore, it seems likely that most of the sheep/goat
represented in the cave were animals that were brought there for slaughter.
Sheep/Goat Butchery Evidence
Butchery marks were observed on 30 sheep/goat elements, mainly from Layer 5 (Table 8).
Most were located on bones that could not be further identified but two of the butchered
bones definitely belonged to sheep. Although no butchery was recorded on any of the
identified goat bones, it is very likely that goat meat was also eaten. Many of the types of
butchery marks observed on sheep/goat elements were similar to those encountered in the pig
assemblage. Most of the marks consisted of fine incisions but deeper marks were encountered
on several bones. For example, a humerus from Layer 5 had been chopped through the distal
articular surface in order to separate it from the radius and ulna. A metacarpal from Layer 3
had similarly been sliced through near the proximal end when it was detached from the
radius. Chop marks were also observed on two vertebrae. More typical were fine incisions
observed on five shaft fragment or distal ends of radii, associated with dismemberment and
possibly skinning, and the cuts near the dorsal ends of six ribs, made during the removal of
the flanks from the vertebral column.
14
Sheep/Goat Age at Death
Estimation of age at death was possible for a total of 22 mandibles or loose teeth from Layers
1, 3 and 5. No very young individuals (<6 months) were represented. Sheep/Goats of all ages
from juvenile to adult are represented, with approximately half belonging to younger
individuals (c.6 months – 2 years) and the rest belonging to adults, including young adults
(c.2-4 years) and adults (c.4-6 years), as well as some very mature adults (>6 years). Some of
the young individuals with deciduous teeth present could be reliably differentiated to sheep
and goat. Positive identifications of both young sheep (2 specimens) and young goat (1
specimen) were made from Layer 5. Layers 1 and 3 each yielded one young sheep. Adult
teeth are more difficult to differentiate, but tentative identifications of goat were made for one
adult specimen from Layer 5 and two adults from Layer 3. In addition, Layer 5 produced two
heavily worn deciduous 4th
premolar teeth with roots almost fully resorbed. These are most
likely teeth that were cast as the adult dentition erupted, and are a good indication that some
sheep/goat were housed inside the cave.
The epiphyseal fusion dataset is mainly comprised of remains from Layer 5, with other layers
making only a small contribution. Amongst the 59 surviving epiphyses known to fuse by
c.10 months, only 20% were unfused, indicating that most sheep/goat were kept beyond their
first year. Although three fragments of very porous (neonatal) bones were recovered from
Layer 5. Of the middle-fusing group of epiphyses, only seven (33%) were fused, supporting
the observation from the dentition that a high proportion of sheep/goat were killed before 2-2
½ years old. A similar proportion of the later fusing epiphyses were fused, suggesting the
majority of sheep/goat were killed before the end of their fourth year.
There is no emphasis on any one age cohort and the available ageing data suggest young
sheep in their first, second and third years were exploited for meat. Adults were kept to a
range of different ages, having probably contributed secondary products before being killed
and consumed.
Sheep/Goat Metrical Data
As with the other major species represented, the high levels of fragmentation severely limited
the number of sheep/goat bones that could be measured. In addition, as discussed in relation
to ageing data, it has not always been possible to determine whether the measured bones
belonged definitely to sheep or to goat. Eight of the 24 measured bones were positively
identified as goat, five were classified as definite or probable sheep, and the remainder as
sheep/goat (Table 11). Unfortunately only three of the measured bones were from Layer 3
(the others are from Layer 5), so it is not possible to compare possible changes in sizes of
sheep and goat between the late Eneolithic and Maikop periods.
Two complete goat metacarpals had greatest lengths of 98.1mm and 113.6mm, indicating that
there was a wide range in the sizes of goats present. The five goat radii from Layer 5 had a
15
mean proximal breadth of 30.1mm (sd 1.9), which lie comfortably within the range of
domestic goat bones recorded elsewhere. However, the presence of wild ovicaprines within
this assemblage cannot be entirely ruled out, as a few specimens were noted as being of large
size. For example the length of a maxillary third molar from Layer 5 measured 22.8mm. This
may have belonged to a large domestic goat but, if so, it is an exceptionally large specimen.
However, unfortunately it has not been possible as yet to compare the morphology and size of
this tooth with other specimens.
Bovid
A total of 355 fragments of bovid bones and teeth (6 from sieved material) were recovered
from the cave, representing a MNI of 10 cattle.
Bovid Body Part Representation
A summary of bovid body part evidence is shown in Table 12 and percentages of the
different elements in Layers 3 and 5 are provided in Figure 4. Full details are stored in the
site archive tables.
The evidence again show that all parts of the body were fairly evenly represented, suggesting
that cattle were brought to the area of the cave for slaughter and subsequent consumption.
Comparison between the assemblages from Layers 3 and 5 shows that cranial elements and
loose teeth were better represented in Layer 3. Their increase was associated with lower
values of all the other body part areas (Table 12).
Skull fragments outnumbered mandible fragments in the NISP counts (Figure 4) and
provided a higher MNE estimate (10) overall compared with mandible (7). Only one small
separate fragment of a horncore was recorded from Layer 1, although the base of another was
found still attached to a skull fragment of a large bovid in Layer 3. Horns may have been
regarded as raw material for working and removed elsewhere. Loose teeth were again well
represented throughout the deposits, particularly in the upper layers.
Upper forelimb elements were consistently outnumbered by those of the hindlimb, although
the difference was not large (Table 12). The NISP counts of the various upper forelimb
elements were fairly similar (Figure 4) with the radius providing the highest MNE count (8),
followed by scapula (6) and humerus (5). Similar MNE counts were obtained for the
principal hindlimb elements headed by tibia (7), femur (6) and pelvis (5). NISP counts of
these elements were also very similar (Figure 4). Metatarsals were the most commonly
recorded of the lower limb elements but first phalanges and carpals were better represented
than in the assemblages of pig and sheep/goat, probably reflecting their larger size, which
gave them a better chance of retrieval. At least seven metatarsals and four metacarpals are
represented.
16
Ribs and vertebrae fragments formed around 15% of the hand-collected assemblage. Both are
also quite well represented in the unidentified large mammal assemblage (Table 13). The vast
majority of the elements in this category are likely to have belonged to cattle.
As in the case of sheep/goat and pig, it seems very likely that most, if not all, of the domestic
cattle bones represented on the site belonged to animals that were brought to the vicinity of
the cave for slaughter, subsequent carcass processing and consumption.
Bovid Butchery Evidence
Butchery marks were observed on 27 bovid elements, 20 of which were from Layer 5 (Table
8). As in the case of pig and sheep/goat, most of these marks consisted of fine knife cuts.
However, there was occasional evidence that a heavier implement was used. For example, a
cattle ramus from Layer 5 bore a fairly deep blade mark inflicted during its separation from
the skull. A pelvis and a scapula, both from Layer 3, had been chopped through the
acetabulum and glenoid respectively during dismemberment. Chop marks were also observed
on two cervical vertebrae from Layer 5.
However, fine incisions were observed much more frequently. These included cuts on two
carpals from Layer %, made during detachment from the metacarpal. Cuts associated with the
separation of the hind feet were also observed on an astragalus and the proximal end of a
metatarsal. Other cuts associated with disarticulation were observed on the proximal end of
two femora, a tibia and a first phalanx. Cut marks probably associated with filleting were
observed on the shafts of two humeri, the ischial shaft of a pelvis. Several other bones had
marks which have not been easy to interpret. As observed for the other species, butchery with
knives can often be carried out with minimal damage to the bones. Subsequent breakage of
bones for marrow and pot boiling undoubtedly also occurred but this evidence has been
compromised by subsequent fragmentation of the bones.
Bovid Age at Death
The sample of teeth and mandibles is too small and fragmentary to provide any clear
indication of mortality patterns. Animals of all ages are represented in the assemblage. Layer
1 yielded one young specimen (<6 months) and one extremely old adult. One neonatal
mandible from a partial calf skeleton was recovered from Layer 2. Layer 3 had no very young
claves present, but juveniles and subadults were represented by at least three specimens. In
addition, Layers 3 and 5 each produced a heavily worn deciduous 4th
premolar tooth with
roots almost fully resorbed. These are most likely teeth that were cast as the adult dentition
erupted, and are a good indication that some cattle were housed inside the cave.
The epiphyseal fusion sample for bovids is also small, and is comprised mostly of Layer 5
material. Only one of the 27 early-fusing epiphyses was unfused, indicating that almost all
17
bovids survived past their first year. Six of the eight mid-fusing epiphyses were fused,
indicating most survived beyond 2 years old. Among the 18 surviving epiphyses known to
fuse between 3 ½ - 4 years, over 60% of specimens were fused and died as adults.
The limited ageing data suggest a combination of younger bovids of prime meat age (c.2-
4years) and older bovids probably utilised as breeding stock and/or for their secondary
products, such as milk and traction power, prior to their consumption.
Bovid Metrical Data
The highly fragmented bovid assemblage again restricted the opportunities to extract metrical
data. Only 13 bones were measured, all but one from Layer 5 (Table 14). Several of these
bones are very large specimens raising the probability that wild bovids (aurochs/bison) as
well as domestic cattle are represented in the assemblage. Examples of very large bones
include a radius with a greatest proximal breadth of 93.1mm and a metatarsal with a distal
breadth of 73.3mm. Indeed, most of the measurements are larger than the means of early and
middle Neolithic cattle from central and western Europe (Manning et al 2015). However, a
larger sample and further comparisons are required with specimens from eastern Europe and
the Near East before more detailed analysis can be made.
Canid
Dog (Canis familiaris) is represented by a total of 16 fragments (including 3 fragments from
sieving) from Layers 1,2, 3 and 5. A further 9 canid fragments are classified more broadly as
dog/fox as they are not clearly distinguishable by size or morphology. Most bones were from
adults with fused epiphyses, although a small number of juveniles (three bones with unfused
epiphyses) were present, but no very young infants/neonates. Some dogs bones do show
evidence of carcass processing; a knife cut on a metatarsal is interpreted as evidence for
skinning, while fine knife cuts on a scapula are more typical of butchery for meat. The
presence of gnawed bones throughout the assemblage indicates dogs shared occupancy of the
cave with people in the role of companion animals, although this role did not exempt them
from occasional exploitation for their pelts or meat.
Red Deer
A total of 46 fragments of bones and teeth of red deer were recovered from all layers. This
small sample represents only 3% of all hand recovered specimens of the main five identified
large mammal species from the site. Red deer remains are slightly more abundant in Layer 3
(5%) compared to Layer 5 (2%), perhaps suggesting a slight increase in importance over
time, although Red deer evidently played only a very minor role in the animal economy
relative to domestic species in all time periods.
18
All main areas of the body (head, forelimbs, hind limbs and feet) are represented (Table 15),
which suggests whole carcasses were processed and consumed in the immediate vicinity of
the cave. It is worth mentioning that more bones of lower limbs were found than for other
body areas, which may well be due to these compact and high density bones surviving better
than other elements, and because foot bones are more abundant in complete deer skeletons
generally. It is also possible that some of these lower limb bones may have been brought into
the cave attached to hides. However, the only two observed butchery marks (chops on 1st
phalanges that split these bones along their length) are not typical of skinning; and any
deliberate selection of foot bones may instead have been for further processing of the carcass
for fats or bone working. Red deer post cranial remains are mostly fused, suggesting adults
were targeted for hunting, although a small minority of unfused specimens indicate that
exploitation of red deer was not exclusively focused on mature individuals.
Roe Deer
Nine roe deer fragments were recovered from Layers 2, 3, 5 and 6. The remains all appear to
be from adults. There is clear evidence that this species was exploited by the local
community, as one fragment of roe deer radius has been identified among the assemblage of
worked bone points.
Wildcat
A total of 9 fragments of wildcat (including 4 from sieving) were recovered from Layers 3
and 5. Classification of felid bones as wild or ‘domestic’ cat is problematic; the distinctions
between the two forms are more behavioural than morphological. However, wildcat tend to
be larger on average than house cats, which can assist in classification of zooarchaeological
specimens (Kratchovil 1976, O’Connor 2007). All the cat bones from Meshoko Cave appear
to be large. Measurements were possible for one complete radius (greatest length 122mm)
and one distal humerus (distal breadth 23.6mm), which are near the top end of the size range
for wildcat (Felis sylvestris) published by Kratchovil, and fall outside the range for domestic
cat. Based on their confirmed large size, all the cat remains from the Meshoko Cave are
considered to be wildcat. All bones are adult. Although only present in small numbers, this
wild species was clearly utilised by the earlier and later occupants of the cave, as fragments
from both Layers 5 and 3 displayed evidence of carcass processing in the form of fine knife
cuts. One mandible had several cut marks towards the rear of the ramus that were most likely
incurred during removal of the head, perhaps during skinning. Other cut marks were found on
a proximal radius, distal humerus and sacral vertebra. Butchery marks in these locations are
typically associated with carcass dismemberment and processing for meat, suggesting
wildcats were exploited for more than just their pelts.
19
Beaver
A total of eight fragments of beaver (Castor fiber), were recovered from Layers 3 and 5. The
presence of beaver is compatible with a wooded environment and indicates accessible
wetland. Only fused (adult) beaver bones were present. One ulna bone displayed fine knife
cuts on the mid shaft, indicative of skinning, suggesting this species was exploited for its fur.
Other Wild Species
Hare (Lepus sp.), otter (Lutra lutra), squirrel (Sciurus sp.), hedgehog (Erinaceus sp), mole
(Talpa sp.) and hamster (family Cricetidae) are all present in small numbers in the cave
assemblage. Otter is restricted to Layer 1, while squirrel, hedgehog, mole and hamster only
occur in Layer 5. Only fused (adult) postcranial remains were observed for hare and otter.
In addition to the identified mammal species listed above, a further 234 fragments of small
mammal bones and teeth were recovered. These are mostly the remains of small (mouse-
sized) rodents, which have not been further identified, and some larger (rat-sized) rodents,
which include remains of probable hamster. Unsurprisingly, the majority of small mammal
remains were recovered by sieving (164 fragments), and the only large assemblage of small
mammals recovered by hand (62 fragments from Layer 2) are the associated bones from the
skeleton of a single individual. Other taxa represented include 1 fragment each of frog, lizard,
and fish.
All these small terrestrial species are compatible with a woodland environment. There is no
direct evidence for the consumption of these wild species, although there is no reason to
suggest that they were not eaten. Some, particularly the smaller of these species, may simply
represent background fauna occupying the cave or its immediate environment.
Birds
A total of 19 fragments of bird were found in the hand-recovered and sieved assemblages.
The majority were recovered from Layer 5, with only 2 fragments from Layer 3, which
reflects the better preservation of bones generally in the lower stratigraphic layer. Provisional
identifications from among the 12 medium sized birds include members of family Corvidae
(cf. rook/crow), family Columbidae (cf. pigeon/dove) and a partridge (cf. Perdix sp.).
Provisional identifications among the large birds suggest these are mainly birds of prey, and
include buzzard (cf. Buteo sp.) and at least one larger species. There is one fine cut mark on
the mid-shaft of a bird of prey femur, and another possible cut mark on a large bird scapula.
Whether these birds were processed for food or for other materials, such as feathers or bone
is unclear (three small beads from among the worked bone artefacts are made from sections
20
of bone shaft that are delicate enough to be from bird, although firm identification was not
possible). It appears that birds were among the wild resources exploited by the inhabitants of
Meshoko Cave.
Worked Bone
A total of 101 fragments of bones and teeth were recorded as probable worked objects, of
which 79 had been previously identified as artefacts by the excavation team and are housed at
the Hermitage state museum. The remaining 22 fragments were recovered from among the
general animal bone assemblage and mostly comprise small fragments of broken worked
bone rather than complete artefacts. Worked remains were recovered from all layers, and as
with the overall bone assemblage, the largest collection came from Layer 5 (79 fragments),
with rather fewer from Layer 3 (17 fragments).
The most common objects observed (at least 66), were bone points of varying size and shape,
some with flat, rounded ends and others fashioned into narrow, sharp points. These points,
plus a few similar (blunt-ended) objects, are mainly made from undiagnostic longbone shaft
fragments rather than complete skeletal elements, the shaping and polishing of which has
further removed any identifying morphological features. Nevertheless, species and element
identifications were possible in a few cases and include: 11 points fashioned from sheep/goat
metapodials, 3 points fashioned from other sheep/goat long bones, 2 points fashioned from
pig fibulae, 2 points fashioned from bovid bones and 1 point fashioned from a roe deer
radius. The remaining bone points were mostly fashioned from medium (sheep-sized)
mammal long bones, with a much smaller proportion fashioned from large (cow-sized)
mammal bones. At least two of the bone points showed signs of having been gnawed by
dogs prior to having been worked, suggesting they were selected from accumulated domestic
refuse, rather than having been reserved for bone-working at the initial stage of slaughter and
butchery. All the bones used to make these objects would have been readily available from
among the remains of animals used for food, and choice of bone for making these utilitarian
objects was probably governed chiefly by whatever was a suitable size and shape and
immediately to hand.
The second most common type of worked bone objects were pendants or beads (at least 15).
Ten of these were made from teeth, identified as follows: pig canines (4) dog canines (3), red
deer canines (2), all with perforations at the root end. The pig canine pendants were all made
from the large curved mandibular tusks of old adult males, and could come from wild boar
rather than domestic pigs (domestic pigs could have reached this size, but males are rarely
kept to such and advanced age in domestic herds). The dog canine teeth include one small
specimen that could possibly belong to a fox, and two canines from much larger dogs (but not
large enough to be wolf). The other smaller beads are not identifiable to element or species,
but at least three beads are made from short sections of small longbone shafts that are delicate
enough to be birds.
21
The worked sample is small and some of the identifications ambiguous, but it is speculated
that the teeth and bones of wild (or at least not the usual domestic herd animals) were
selected for personal ornamentation (beads and pendants), while the more utilitarian objects
(bone points) were made from the more common domestic /food species.
Discussion
Although the faunal assemblage is relatively small and not exceptionally well preserved, the
careful excavation of the deposits and the meticulous collection of all the animal bones has
enabled the investigation of animal exploitation by people who occupied the Meshoko Cave
over a considerable period. The largest, and therefore most reliable, assemblage belongs to
Layer 5 (late Eneolithic) but although the Layer 3 assemblage (Maikop Period) is much
smaller, it does allow some comparisons to be made both between the assemblage from Layer
5 and between other Maikop period assemblages. Comparisons can also be made with the
bone assemblage from the earlier occupation of the Meshoko settlement (Hambleton and
Maltby unpublished).
Layer 5 (Eneolithic) – Exploitation of Pigs, Sheep/Goat and Bovids
This assemblage is dominated by the bones of pigs, sheep/goat and bovids. Although the
intra-site analysis has demonstrated that there were significant variations in the abundance of
these categories in these deposits, there can be no doubt that the inhabitants of the cave relied
very heavily on these species for their meat supply. Pigs and sheep/goat remains were found
in roughly equal numbers in Layer 5. Sheep and goats were better represented in this layer
(37% of the total of pig, sheep/goat, bovid and red deer counts in the hand-collected sample)
in comparison to the earlier deposits at Meshoko settlement (21% - Hambleton and Maltby
unpublished). Goat bones outnumber those of sheep in this layer and it is possible that goats
were better adapted to the local ecological conditions around the cave and therefore featured
more prominently in the diets of the cave’s inhabitants during its early period of occupation.
The almost complete absence of bones and teeth of neonatal lambs and kids may partly be the
consequence of poor preservation of these fragile and small elements, but it could indicate
that sheep and goats were not kept in or near the cave in the Spring. However, that some
sheep were kept in the cave during at least some periods of the year is attested by the
presence of shed deciduous teeth. The sheep and goats that were eaten in the cave were
slaughtered at various ages from six months onwards. However, around half of them were
killed before adulthood indicating a focus on the exploitation of sheep and goats for meat,
although it should be borne in mind that this slaughter pattern may not be typical of all
settlements of this period.
Although pigs also formed a substantial proportion of the Layer 5 assemblage (36% of the
total of pig, sheep/goat, bovid and red deer counts in the hand-collected sample), they were
22
less well represented than in the Meshoko settlement, where they formed 48% of the
assemblage (Hambleton and Maltby unpublished). The ecology around the cave and indeed
throughout the local region would have been well suited both for domestic and wild pigs,
both of which would have had ample feeding opportunities in the surrounding woodland.
Although no shed deciduous teeth of pigs were found, indicating the presence of live animals
within the cave, the presence of some bones of perinatal and neonatal animals indicates that
some pigs may have been present during their birthing season, probably in the Spring. The
tooth ageing evidence suggests that most of the pigs represented in the cave were more than
six months old when they were culled, although the epiphyseal fusion evidence suggests that
possibly half of the pigs represented were younger than a year old at death. This could
suggest that there was a peak of killing in the autumn, after the pigs had been fattened on the
products of the forest. Such a high rate of immature slaughter is much more likely to be
encountered in domestic herds, on which greater control can be exercised than in the case of
wild populations (Hongo and Meadow 1998).
Bovid elements formed 24% of the fragments of pig, sheep/goat, bovid and red deer in Layer
5, despite being very poorly represented in the area of the cave excavated in 2013. The
equivalent percentage of bovids at the Meshoko settlement was slightly higher (27%). As in
the case for sheep and goat, there is little evidence that calving took place on or near the cave,
although the discovery of shed deciduous teeth does indicate that some live cattle did enter
the cave. Unlike pigs, there is little evidence that bovids were regularly culled prior to their
second year, although a substantial proportion of them died before full maturity.
All parts of the bodies of pigs, sheep/goat and bovids were represented and in general the
body part distribution suggests that most of these animals were slaughtered in the vicinity of
the cave. Indeed, clear evidence of slaughter is witnessed on two pig skulls, which had
evidence for pole-axing. Most butchery was carried out with the use of fine blades, although
a few bones of bovids and sheep/goat also produced evidence for the use of heavier
implements during carcass partitioning.
Layer 3 (Maikop Period) – Exploitation of Pigs, Sheep/Goat and Bovids
Comparisons between the Layer 3 and Layer 5 assemblages are handicapped by the small
size of the Layer 3 sample and by the fact that it was less well preserved. There is little that
can be added regarding ageing and butchery evidence because of the limitations of the sample
size. Currently, there is no convincing evidence that there were significant changes in the
exploitation of domestic stock between the two periods. With regards to species
representation, this assemblage is also largely composed of the bones of pigs, sheep/goat and
bovids but there is an increase in the percentage of pigs (45% of the major species) with a
concomitant decrease in percentages of sheep/goat (28%). The percentage of bovids (23%)
was similar to that found in Layer 5.
The dominance of pig in this assemblage contrasts with other Maikop period assemblages,
which are usually dominated by bones of domestic cattle (Kohl 2009, 78). However, in the
23
case of Meshoko Cave we may be dealing with local adaptations. Pig herding complemented
by the hunting of wild boar in the forests in the vicinity of Meshoko seems to have been an
important activity since at least the early period of occupation of the fortified settlement and
the importance of pigs was also witnessed in the late Eneolithic layers of the cave. It would
be natural for the inhabitants of the cave to make full use of the wooded environment, either
directly through the collection of the fruits of the forest, as indicated in the discovery of a
cache of pears in the cave, or indirectly through the continued and possibly increased
exploitation of domestic pigs and, to a lesser extent, wild boar.
Another possible change in the exploitation of animals at Meshoko Cave in this period was
the decline in the number of goats compared to sheep, although larger samples are required to
confirm this impression. It should also be noted that no bones of horse were recovered from
the excavations of the cave, a phenomenon typical of other Maikop settlements (Kohl 2009,
78).
The Role of Wild Animals
Among the species typically classed as domestic (pig, cattle and sheep/goat) there still
remains some ambiguity, as several specimens were notable for their large size, suggesting
that wild variants of pigs and bovids in particular could be represented in the sample.
However, the actual proportion of wild versus domestic is impossible to determine based on
size, as many specimens are immature and fragmented, and metrical distinctions require
intact adult remains.
Taking the unequivocal wild species (dog/fox counted here as dog), overall 5% of the
identified hand-recovered specimens belonged to wild animals. Layer 5 has 4% wild species,
and Layer 3 has 7%. Although the percentage of wild remains is marginally greater in Layer
3, there is a more diverse range of species in Layer 5. Differences are slight, but may hint at
subtle changes in the use of wild species through time. Certainly, wild species were
continuously exploited as a resource throughout the occupation of Meshoko Cave, although
their contribution to the diet was minimal. Nevertheless wild species may have had an
important cultural significance to communities living in the woodland environment of the
region during this time period (see also the discussion of worked bone above).
Assessment of the Sieving Programme
The sieving programme carried out in 2015 involved the collection of all the spoil after the
finds from hand excavation had been removed. It therefore served to test the effectiveness of
normal excavation methods and to confirm whether species or particular types of elements
not recorded in hand-collected assemblages were truly absent.
24
Although wet-sieving is a laborious and time-consuming task, the results of this exercise
were fruitful. In the first place, it confirmed that although standards of recovery from hand
excavation were very good, there were some bones of the major species that were more likely
to be overlooked, such as the small bones of the feet of pigs and sheep/goat. The results
indicated that pigs in particular were probably slightly under-represented in the hand-
collected sample. The discovery of bones of perinatal pigs through sieving was also
important, as it confirmed that some sows were being kept around the cave during the
birthing season.
Sieving also produced evidence for the presence of more bones of wild species, notably the
butchered mandible of a wildcat. It also confirmed that fish bones had not been overlooked
and that fishing was not an important activity for the cave’s inhabitants. Although one or two
additional bones of wild birds were retrieved, the sieving programme also confirmed that the
exploitation of gamebirds was rarely, if ever, practised.
Normal recovery methods retrieved most of the hamster bones but, apart from the cluster of
bones in Layer 2, bones from smaller rodents were generally only recovered in the sieve.
Although these and other small species such as frog and lizard almost certainly did not
contribute to the human food supply, confirmation of their presence and abundance adds
information about the environment both within the cave itself and in it immediate
neighbourhood.
Conclusion
On its own, an assemblage of modest size retrieved from a single cave site cannot be
expected to provide us with a comprehensive understanding of Eneolithic and early Bronze
Age animal exploitation and meat consumption in the northern Caucasus. By its very nature,
the cave and the activities of its inhabitants may not have been typical of other settlements in
the region. However, the analysis has produced important evidence concerning the
exploitation of animals by the inhabitants of that cave and has provided new insights into
how the cave was used and how the local environment was exploited. It has shown that not
all Maikop period faunal assemblages are dominated by cattle and, in conjunction with the
evidence from the earlier Meshoko settlement, the analysis has indicated that the
communities around Meshoko may have focused more on pig exploitation over a long period
of time than contemporary groups in the broader region.
The excavations have also shown how a carefully considered sieving and sampling
programme can enhance the quality of the faunal evidence and improve our understanding of
animal exploitation and local environmental conditions. There is further potential for study.
We have yet to carry out detailed intra-site analysis of the distribution of animal bones within
the cave utilising their location points. Potentially such a study may provide further insights
into how the cave was used. Continued excavations of the cave will provide further material
25
to analyse, which will challenge or support some of the preliminary conclusions reached here.
In addition, there are assemblages from recent excavations of the earlier Meshoko settlement
that have yet to be analysed. Their study will significantly increase the size of the sample of
bones obtained from that complex site and allow for a more comprehensive interpretation of
animal exploitation and consumption at that complex site. It will also provide us with further
information about long-term trends in human-animal relationships in the region, to which the
current study of the cave assemblage has already contributed.
Acknowledgements
This work forms part of a bilateral agreement between Bournemouth University (BU) and St
Petersburg State University (SPSU) to collaborate over research and teaching. Our thanks are
due to Evgenii Cherlenok from SPSU for permission to work on the assemblage and making
the material available and for his general insights and support. We also thank Sergei
Ostashinskii from the State Hermitage Museum, for making the worked bone available to us
for identification and Anton Murashkin (SPSU) for facilitating our visits to Saint Petersburg.
Thanks also to BU students Lewis Busby, Sarah Heselden, Emily Shrimpton and Sam Walker
for their hard work and enthusiasm undertaking bone identification and recording during our
first season of analysis; to Sheila Hamilton-Dyer, Emma Jenkins and Julia Best (all of BU)
for assisting in the provisional identifications of small mammals, birds and lizards; to
Katharine Judelson for translation services; and to Mark Brisbane (BU) for helping with the
logistics of the collaboration and continued support of the project. The work was partially
funded by the BU Fusion Fund, the Global Horizons travel fund supported by Santander and
by the Faculty of Science and Technology at BU.
References
Albarella, U., Dobney, K. and Rowley-Conwy, P. 2009. Size and shape of the Eurasian wild
boar (Sus scrofa), with a view to the reconstruction of its Holocene history. Environmental
Archaeology 14 (2): 103-136.
Boessneck, J. 1969. Osteological differences between sheep (Ovis aries Linne) and goat
(Capra hircus Linne). In D.Brothwell and E. Higgs (eds.), Science in Archaeology (2nd
Edition). London: Thames and Hudson: 331-358.
Grant A. 1982. The use of tooth wear as a guide to the age of domestic ungulates. In B.
Wilson, C. Grigson and S. Payne (eds.), Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from
Archaeological Sites. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports (British Series) 109: 91-108.
Hambleton, E. 1999. Animal Husbandry Regimes in Iron Age Britain. Oxford: British
Archaeological Reports, British Series 282.
26
Hambleton, E. and Maltby, M. Unpublished. Faunal Remains from Excavations in 2007 at
the Meshoko Settlement in the Northern Caucasus. Specialist Report to the Excavators.
Hongo, H. and Meadow, R. 1998. Pig exploitation at Neolithic Çayönü Tepesi (Southern
Anatolia) In S.M. Nelson (ed), Ancestors for the Pigs: Pigs in Prehistory. Philadelphia:
MASCA 15: 77-98.
Jones, G. G. 2006. Tooth eruption and wear observed in live sheep from Butser Hill, the
Cotswold Farm Park, and five farms in the Pentland Hills, UK. In Ruscillo, D (ed.) Recent
advances in ageing and sexing animal bones. Proceedings of the 9th ICAZ Conference,
Durham 2002. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Jones, G. G. and Sadler, P. 2012 a. A review of published sources for age at death in cattle.
Environmental Archaeology. 17 (1): 1-10.
Jones, G. G. and Sadler, P. 2012 b. Age at death in cattle: methods, older cattle and known-
age reference material. Environmental Archaeology. 17 (1): 11-28.
Kohl, P. 2007. The Making of Bronze Age Eurasia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kratochvil, Z. 1976. Das postkranialskelett der Wild- und Hauskatze (Felis silvestris und F.
lybica f. catus). Acta Scientiarium Naturalium Brno 10(6): 1–43.
Maltby, M. 2010. Feeding a Roman Town: Environmental Evidence from Excavations in
Winchester 1972-1985. Winchester: Winchester Museums.
Manning, K., Timpson, A., Shennan, S. and Crema, E. 2015. Size reduction in early
European domestic cattle relates to intensification of Neolithic herding strategies. PLoS ONE
10(12): e0141873. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0141873.
Matschke, G. H. 1967. Aging European wild hogs by dentition. Journal of Wildlife
Management 31: 109-113.
O'Connor, T. P. 2007. Wild or domestic? Biometric variation in the cat Felis silvestris
Schreber. International journal of Osteoarchaeology 17: 581–595.
Payne, S. 1973. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Asvan kale.
Anatolian Studies 23: 281-305
Payne, S. 1985. Morphological distinctions between the mandibular teeth of young sheep,
Ovis, and goat, Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science 12: 139-147.
Prummel, W. and Friesch, H.-J .1986. A guide to the distinction of species, sex and body side
in bones of sheep and goat. Journal of Archaeological Science 13: 567-577.
Reitz, E. J. and Wing, E. S. 1999. Zooarchaeology. London: Academic Press.
Silver, I. 1969. The ageing of domestic animals. In D. Brothwell and E. Higgs (eds.), Science
in Archaeology (2nd Edition). London: Thames and Hudson: 283-302.
von den Driesch, A. 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from
Archaeological Sites. Harvard: Peabody Museum Monograph 1.
27
Zeder, M. and Lapham, H. 2010. Assessing the reliability of criteria used to identify
postcranial bones in sheep, Ovis, and goats, Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science 37:
2887-2905.